Regarding the “magic molecule” probability, what you calculated here is the tail of a model you assumed, which treats lifespan effects as if all possible compounds follow a single normal distribution, and the DrugAge compounds are random samples from it (or a biased sample, doesnt change the core issue). But I doubt that's the case, that compounds follow such a distribution... It's a rather strong (and pessimistic) assumption.
That said, I think there’s a good reason to question if a single molecule could cause such a big effect, because it would have to modulate so many processes at once. Moreover, if such a molecule existed and were accessible, evolution should have discovered and kept it. Small lifespan tweaks can hide behind trade-offs, but a 50% boost is extremely hard to beat in terms of fitness, unless some other force, e.g. population-level selection, makes lifespan extension undesiarable.
Thanks Tomer. Fair point that the blog calc is a simplification. That said, even if the specific probability is off by orders of magnitude, the directional conclusion holds. Your evolutionary argument actually makes the case more directly. Aging isn't one pathway, it's entropy across dozens of systems. A molecule achieving dramatic extension would need to hit some master regulator upstream of all of them or coordinate effects simultaneously.
Nice post!
Regarding the “magic molecule” probability, what you calculated here is the tail of a model you assumed, which treats lifespan effects as if all possible compounds follow a single normal distribution, and the DrugAge compounds are random samples from it (or a biased sample, doesnt change the core issue). But I doubt that's the case, that compounds follow such a distribution... It's a rather strong (and pessimistic) assumption.
That said, I think there’s a good reason to question if a single molecule could cause such a big effect, because it would have to modulate so many processes at once. Moreover, if such a molecule existed and were accessible, evolution should have discovered and kept it. Small lifespan tweaks can hide behind trade-offs, but a 50% boost is extremely hard to beat in terms of fitness, unless some other force, e.g. population-level selection, makes lifespan extension undesiarable.
Thanks Tomer. Fair point that the blog calc is a simplification. That said, even if the specific probability is off by orders of magnitude, the directional conclusion holds. Your evolutionary argument actually makes the case more directly. Aging isn't one pathway, it's entropy across dozens of systems. A molecule achieving dramatic extension would need to hit some master regulator upstream of all of them or coordinate effects simultaneously.